Angad Singh on MRFA Tender: “IAF Wants Rafale, An Open Tender Would Waste Time”

SOURCE: AFI

Angad Singh, a respected defense analyst, recently voiced his perspective on India’s Medium Multi-Role Fighter Aircraft (MRFA) tender during an interview with India Today. Singh emphasized that the Indian Air Force (IAF) has made it clear that its preference is the Rafale fighter jet, arguing that any attempt to conduct an open tender for the MRFA would be a costly waste of time.

Singh’s comments come as India approaches a significant decision for bolstering its fighter jet capabilities. The MRFA tender, which is anticipated to involve the acquisition of 114 advanced fighter jets for the IAF, has seen considerable interest from global aerospace companies. However, according to Singh, the IAF’s intent is straightforward, and so is the government’s understanding of it: the IAF wants the Rafale to complete its fleet requirements.

India’s MRFA tender is a continuation of efforts dating back to the Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) competition, launched over a decade ago. After extensive trials, the Dassault Rafale emerged as the winner, but complications led to the contract’s cancellation. In 2016, India opted for a government-to-government agreement with France, purchasing 36 Rafale jets under an emergency acquisition to bolster the IAF’s fleet strength.

Now, with the MRFA tender, India seeks to address a longstanding gap in its fleet. The IAF aims to maintain a combat force of 42 squadrons but currently faces a shortfall. The MRFA program seeks to fill this gap, adding to the IAF’s capability and preparing it to face threats on both the eastern and western fronts.

Singh points out that the IAF’s affinity for the Rafale isn’t just about adding numbers. The 36 Rafales that India acquired in 2016 came with India-specific enhancements—custom features that cater to unique operational requirements. These enhancements cover a range of critical capabilities, from advanced radar and avionics to specific modifications for electronic warfare, ensuring that the aircraft can handle regional challenges. Given the investment already made into these enhancements, Singh argues that moving forward with another platform would be inefficient and resource-intensive.

Additionally, selecting the Rafale for the MRFA tender would allow the IAF to streamline training, maintenance, and logistical infrastructure, avoiding the added complexity and costs associated with a new platform. The Rafale has already proven itself as a highly capable multirole fighter for the IAF, excelling in high-altitude operations and showcasing adaptability to various mission requirements. Introducing another aircraft would mean restarting these processes, likely at considerable expense and with potential delays.

One of Singh’s strongest points is the potential for delay that an open tender could create. A global competition would involve a lengthy process of inviting bids, conducting evaluations, and assessing the technological and economic offers of various contenders. This could take years, during which India’s security landscape will continue to evolve. Given the timeline, Singh suggests that an open tender would unnecessarily prolong the procurement process, impeding the IAF’s ability to address its squadron shortfall in a timely manner.

“The government already knows what the IAF wants,” Singh stated. “It’s the Rafale, and an open tender for MRFA would only waste precious time. The urgency of India’s security requirements demands a streamlined process, and the Rafale has already proven to be a suitable choice.”

A direct selection of the Rafale for the MRFA could potentially offer strategic and economic advantages. Given that India has already invested in the infrastructure and training for the initial Rafale fleet, adding more units would maximize these investments. This would enable the IAF to avoid duplicative costs and allow Indian defense contractors to deepen their collaboration with Dassault Aviation and Safran, fostering further skill development and technology transfer.

Furthermore, expanding the Rafale fleet might open doors for deeper defense cooperation with France. France has consistently supported India’s defense initiatives, especially concerning issues of strategic autonomy and regional stability. Relying on an ally with proven technological support and willingness to collaborate closely could offer strategic leverage for India, both diplomatically and technologically.

However, proponents of a Rafale-only approach argue that deepening ties with Dassault and Safran for Rafale manufacturing could still align with Atmanirbharta by prioritizing technology transfer and local production capabilities. Dassault has already engaged with Indian companies through offsets, and expanding this relationship could bring greater technological autonomy.

Angad Singh’s assertion that an open tender for the MRFA would be a “terrible waste of time” reflects a pragmatic stance that takes into account the operational, economic, and strategic realities of India’s defense landscape. The IAF’s preference for Rafale appears rooted in an understanding of the fighter’s capabilities, its compatibility with Indian-specific requirements, and the financial prudence of maximizing prior investments.